Common Lisp is a dpANS in Public Review

Common Lisp is a dpANS in Public Review

Author

Message

Barry Margol#1 / 5

Common Lisp is a dpANS in Public Review

My apologies to those of you who are seeing lots of copies of this (both from me and Kent Pitman). I wanted to make sure that it reaches all the people to whom it should be relevant, and there's naturally quite a bit of overlap.

Common Lisp is now a draft proposed American National Standard (dpANS) and is in a period of public review that extends until November 23, 1992. It's -not- an ANSI standard yet, but this is a major milestone in the standardization process. A press release from X3 containing further details, including ordering information, follows at the end of this message.

Although review comments are not required to be in any particular form, we plan to publish a template which people can voluntarily comply with if they have comments to make. Information about that template will be distributed soon over this same communication channel.

This message is a broadcast distribution to a very large number of recipients. PLEASE DO NOT REPLY TO THE FULL RECIPIENT LIST.

X3 ANNOUNCES THE PUBLIC REVIEW AND COMMENT PERIOD ON X3.226-199X, PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE COMMON LISP

Washington, D.C.--Accredited Standards Committee X3, Information Processing Systems announces the four-month public review and comment period on X3.226, 199x, Programming Language Common Lisp. THE COMMENT PERIOD EXTENDS FROM JULY 24, 1992 THROUGH NOVEMBER 23, 1992.

The specification set forth in this document is designed to promote the portability of Common Lisp programs among a variety of data processing systems. It is a language specification aimed at an audience of implementors and knowledgeable programmers. It is neither a tutorial nor an implementation guide.

The X3 Secretariat is investigating the possibility of making these files available in electronic format, on disk as well as on CompuServe. If you have a need for either or both, please contact Dan Arnold at (202) 626-5747 (email address from CompuServe "75300,2354" or if from

this is cool. how about if an electronic copy (which I understand to be both Tex and DVI versions) gets into an anon-ftp site?

-- clint --

Clint Hyde "Give me a LispM or give me death!" -- anonymous

2111 Wilson Blvd #800 Arlington, VA 22201 (703) 875-0327

Tue, 07 Feb 1995 03:27:58 GMT

Chuck F#3 / 5

Common Lisp is a dpANS in Public Review

Quote:

>this is cool. how about if an electronic copy (which I understand to >be both Tex and DVI versions) gets into an anon-ftp site?

I was just thinking that once it becomes a standard, it should be available on CD-ROM, preferably with a KWIC index and a (reasonably) portable accessor program written in CL, and tied to the DOCUMENTATION mechanism already in the language! Any takers?

Chair, Lisp Users and Vendors '93 conference

Tue, 07 Feb 1995 03:34:36 GMT

Clinton Hy#4 / 5

Common Lisp is a dpANS in Public Review

I don't know about the CD-ROM part, but the rest of the idea sounds good.

if one were to do the CD-ROM part, it should probably include beaucoup other ANSI std dox also, for many other prog languages (none of which are even half as cool as Lisp, but there are {*filter*}s who use them anyway).

what would be WAY cool is if there were a gnu-emacs texinfo file of CLtL2, the ANSI std version, etc.

-- clint --

Clint Hyde "Give me a LispM or give me death!" -- anonymous

2111 Wilson Blvd #800 Arlington, VA 22201 (703) 875-0327

Tue, 07 Feb 1995 06:34:45 GMT

John R. Levi#5 / 5

Common Lisp is a dpANS in Public Review

Quote:

>if one were to [put copies of the Lisp standard on CD-ROM], it should >probably include beaucoup other ANSI std dox also, for many other prog >languages ...

ANSI gets most of their revenue from selling their copyrighted standards documents, which cost about $50 each. So a CD-ROM with copies of 25 standards would have to cost about $1000 to give them similar revenue.

Everyone agrees that particularly for computer standards it would be really nice to make them available via FTP, CD-ROM, etc. But so far nobody has come up with a plausible way to make up for the lost revenue that ANSI needs to stay in business. An advantage of the current system is that standards are paid for by people who actually use them.